Peer Review and Arbitration Policy

Scientific Evaluation and Review Policy:

The scientific evaluation strengthens the research paper submitted to the journal and helps the editorial board make the appropriate decision for its publication. It also benefits researchers in improving and correcting their research papers.

The research paper is sent to three reviewers in the same specialty for scientific evaluation and to write a detailed report on its originality in light of a specific model.

The journal considers the scientific evaluation process the most important stage of scientific publishing. Part of the journal's policy is to ensure the professionalism of the reviewers' work and their adherence to the journal's ethics.

The editor-in-chief, in collaboration with the editorial board, is responsible for selecting suitable reviewers according to the subject of the submitted research papers and their specialty and ability to assess the scientific merit of the research paper.

One of the reviewers must be from outside the university or country, with the hope of evaluating the research paper within a maximum period of one month. Otherwise, they must decline within a week.

If there are negative reports from two reviewers, the research paper will not be accepted for publication as it is considered unfit for publication.

The researcher is informed of the decision regarding the publication based on the reviewers' reports within a period not exceeding one month from the date of submission to the editorial board.

The researcher must make the reviewers' recommended revisions to their research paper according to the reports sent to them and provide the journal with a revised version within a period not exceeding two weeks.

The journal then verifies the language in both Arabic and English before sending it for publication.

Review Policy

  • The peer-review process is double-blind,
  • That is, the reviewer cannot disclose the identity of the researcher, and the researcher cannot disclose the identity of the reviewer.